"These plunging profits are due to many factors: Chinese competition; Germany’s failure to keep up with cutting-edge technology, communication infrastructure, and business practices; American sabotage by tariff warfare and filching German companies via subsidies; and last but not least, the horrendous energy costs that the entire EU has inflicted on itself by going to war – by Ukrainian proxy and sanctions – against Russia."

The author lists multiple causes for Germany's economic problems, reducing the complex interplay to a single 'last but not least' cause: the EU's decision to go to war against Russia by Ukrainian proxy and sanctions. While this is presented as one factor among many, the phrasing 'last but not least' and the subsequent focus on this point, particularly as 'horrendous energy costs that the entire EU has inflicted on itself,' strongly implies this as the primary or most significant cause, oversimplifying a multifaceted economic issue.

"the horrendous energy costs that the entire EU has inflicted on itself by going to war – by Ukrainian proxy and sanctions – against Russia."

The phrase 'horrendous energy costs' uses emotionally charged language to describe economic effects. The accompanying claim that the EU 'inflicted on itself' these costs by 'going to war – by Ukrainian proxy and sanctions – against Russia' is a loaded framing of the geopolitical situation, assigning blame and portraying a complex international response as self-inflicted harm through proxy warfare.

"Namely, a policy of going into massive public debt – under a so-called conservative – to finance a bizarre form of military Keynesianism that is based on illusions (no, Russia is not about to attack), produces self-reinforcing Russophobia (which makes a return to normality even harder), and won’t work as an economic boost, as even the usually government-aligned Spiegel has admitted."

The author exaggerates the German policy as 'bizarre Military Keynesianism' based on 'illusions' and leading to 'self-reinforcing Russophobia,' which 'makes a return to normality even harder.' The claim that 'Russia is not about to attack' is presented as an objective truth, dismissing concerns as illusory, which minimizes the perceived threat and the rationale for the policy.

"In short, like a prism, the Osnabrueck plan bundles together many of Germany’s worst – and self-inflicted – problems, and the single silliest idea of how to tackle them."

The phrases 'Germany's worst – and self-inflicted – problems' and 'the single silliest idea of how to tackle them' use emotionally charged and judgmental language to negatively frame the economic situation and the proposed solution without providing specific objective evidence to support such strong condemnations.

"The plan also encapsulates Germany’s complicity with Israel’s crimes, an obstinate policy that is deeply immoral, has twisted Germany’s domestic politics and discourse toward cynical racism, censorship, and authoritarian restrictions on free speech (as a UN report has confirmed), and, moreover, is stupidly shortsighted as well, since it alienates most of the world, and in particular, its rising part in the Global South."

The author uses highly charged, condemnatory language such as 'complicity with Israel’s crimes,' 'deeply immoral,' 'twisted Germany’s domestic politics... toward cynical racism, censorship, and authoritarian restrictions on free speech,' and 'stupidly shortsighted.' These phrases are designed to evoke strong negative emotions and deliver a moral judgment rather than present a neutral analysis, even while citing a UN report for some claims.

"Given the many crimes committed not only by the Israeli state, but also large numbers of individual Israelis as well as Israeli institutions and businesses, that in itself is a global scandal."

The claim that 'large numbers of individual Israelis as well as Israeli institutions and businesses' commit 'many crimes' leading to a 'global scandal' is an exaggeration. While the article goes on to detail specific instances of corporate involvement, the blanket statement implies widespread individual criminality and institutional wrongdoing without specific evidence or context for 'large numbers of individual Israelis'.

"And not only the infernal Palantir but Microsoft as well – with its Azure and Nimbus systems – has directly helped the Israeli military while it carries out genocide."

The word 'infernal' is emotionally charged and pejorative, designed to create a strong negative association with Palantir. The author directly accuses Microsoft of 'directly helped the Israeli military while it carries out genocide,' an extremely serious and condemnatory accusation.

"Zionism doesn’t only destroy and displace. To be fair, it also builds – namely, illegal settlements on territories that are officially called ‘occupied’ but have in reality been de facto annexed by Israel in its ceaseless, aggressive drive for even more ‘Lebensraum’ in a ‘Greater Israel’ that has never even defined its borders."

The phrase 'ceaseless, aggressive drive for even more 'Lebensraum'' uses highly emotional and historically charged language (Lebensraum is associated with Nazi expansionism) to equate Israeli settlement policy with aggressive, genocidal territorial expansion. This is a strong pejorative framing, going beyond a neutral description of policies.

"And don’t let the Israeli Hasbara propaganda fool you: There is no room for debate here."

The phrase 'There is no room for debate here' attempts to shut down further discussion or alternative perspectives on the issue of Israeli actions. By asserting that the matter is settled and beyond debate, it discourages critical thinking or the consideration of differing viewpoints.

"Unfortunately, making Israel obey the law – or basic moral precepts everyone else recognizes as binding intuitively (Don’t target children with snipers, for instance, or Don’t torture toddlers) – has always been a challenge, not least because of Washington’s criminal support for Israel’s criminal regime. None of this means the law does not apply."

The phrases 'criminal support for Israel’s criminal regime' are highly inflammatory and accusatory, portraying both the US and Israeli governments as engaging in criminal activity, without legal judgment or specific, explicit evidence to justify the 'criminal' label. The examples of 'Don’t target children with snipers, for instance, or Don’t torture toddlers' use emotionally extreme scenarios to frame the argument in stark moral terms.

"A decade ago, VW set up Cymotive Technologies with Israeli partners. And not just any partners, but spooks from the infamous Shin Bet intelligence service."

The author associates VW's previous partnership with 'spooks from the infamous Shin Bet intelligence service.' Labelling the intelligence service 'infamous' and its members as 'spooks' is an attempt to create a negative impression by association, implying nefarious activity without direct evidence of wrongdoing in the Cymotive Technologies venture.

"If you have heard of how extraordinarily proud Israel has been of its heinous weaponization of international supply chains to carry out its 2024 pager attacks in Lebanon – a form of terrorism, as a former CIA director rightly noted – that might give you food for thought while driving."

The language 'extraordinarily proud of its heinous weaponization' and 'a form of terrorism' uses highly emotional and condemnatory terms to describe Israel's actions. The term 'heinous' is particularly strong and judgmental, designed to provoke outrage rather than to neutrally describe an event.

"It seems Volkswagen and its Berlin backers have lost not only whatever sense of ethics they have ever had but also quality."

The author casts doubt on the ethics and quality of Volkswagen and its backers by stating they 'have lost not only whatever sense of ethics they have ever had but also quality.' This is a direct attack on their moral standing and competence without presenting specific evidence for the complete absence of ethics or quality.

"Obvisously, there is the ugly irony of one of Nazi Germany’s main arms makers shifting back to its old business model. Then, while many companies and countries cultivate ties with the genocidal apartheid state of Israel and neglect their legal obligations to stop its crimes, Germany adds the very peculiar hypocrisy of shielding its intense complicity with Israel by abusing the memory of Germany’s own genocide of Europe’s Jews, the Holocaust. It is hard to imagine a greater moral and intellectual perversion."

The passage uses extremely emotionally charged and condemnatory language: 'ugly irony,' 'genocidal apartheid state of Israel,' 'intense complicity,' 'abusing the memory of Germany’s own genocide,' and 'a greater moral and intellectual perversion.' These phrases are intended to evoke strong moral outrage against the actions and policies described, framing them in the most negative possible light.

"If Germany had to learn one lesson from its genocides – the Holocaust and that of the Herero and Nama as well – then it was: This crime must never be committed. By no one. Not by Nazis, not by Zionists, either. And it cannot be done to anyone, not to Jews, not to Palestinians – even by Jews. Finally, no one must ever side with the perpetrators. No perpetrators, including Jewish ones."

The author presents a false dilemma by equating 'Nazis' with 'Zionists' and implying that if Germany learned its lesson, it must oppose Zionists in the same way it opposes Nazis. This creates an either/or choice that oversimplifies the complex historical and political contexts of both groups, ignoring nuanced positions or the possibility of different criticisms/support, and suggesting a direct moral equivalence that does not fully account for historical differences. It forces a choice between supporting this specific characterization of 'Zionists' or being seen as not having learned the lesson of past genocides.